Canada, non-Inc.

[Wake Up! Productions]

This does not make the nation a CORPORATION in the sense of a 'business run for profit'.

Nobody on here was claiming anything about a 'business run for profit' - in fact I attempted to dispel that myth. The angle that I was getting at is that under International Law, nations are considered to be and treated as "municipal corporations", just on a much larger scale. This is what my research has found, and I would love for someone to disprove this.

Ninja does have a point, how can we go on to Youtube or Facebook and quash freeman theories if those here on Q don't really know the full answer to this question?

[arayder]

This does not make the nation a CORPORATION in the sense of a 'business run for profit'.

Nobody on here was claiming anything about a 'business run for profit' - in fact I attempted to dispel that myth. The angle that I was getting at is that under International Law, nations are considered to be and treated as "municipal corporations", just on a much larger scale. This is what my research has found, and I would love for someone to disprove this.

Ninja does have a point, how can we go on to Youtube or Facebook and quash freeman theories if those here on Q don't really know the full answer to this question?

It's been answered.

The problem is the freeman's faulty logic which arrives at the incorrect conclusion that "incorporated" governments and "incorporated" businesses are the same in all ways because they share one charactoristic and one word in their description.

In the end freemen use their poor reasoning to tell each other they can escape the rule of law by ending the fantasy contract with the government in the same way one tells the exterminator not to come back next month.

The difference being that the bug man doesn't have the constitutional authority to force you buy his bug spray services.

It has been my experience that when confronted with this reality freemen, and liked minded souls, start back with the same error of logic and try to argue that constitutions and a corporate business charters are the same in all ways because they are alike in one way. . .that they create an entity out of thin air.

If you want to stop freemen in their tracks just ask them the last time their bug man arrested someone and enforced bug man law upon them.

[wserra]

under International Law, nations are considered to be and treated as "municipal corporations", just on a much larger scale. This is what my research has found, and I would love for someone to disprove this.

That's not the way law works. If you have a legal proposition - countries are somehow corporations - you're the one who needs to prove it. No one else needs to prove the negative.

All of this may be semantics in any event. Assume for the sake of argument that Canada is a corporation. Therefore . . . what? Its statutes are just corporate by-laws, no more binding on you than are Ford's? If not that - which I've heard - what? If there is no "what", then I don't care about any of this. Call Canada a Volkswagen for all I care, so long as you don't draw any absurd conclusions from it.

how can we go on to Youtube or Facebook and quash freeman theories if those here on Q don't really know the full answer to this question?

But we do.

[Wake Up! Productions]

Assume for the sake of argument that Canada is a corporation. Therefore . . . what? Its statutes are just corporate by-laws, no more binding on you than are Ford's?

No, I don't care about the freeman angle of how to disobey the law and (not) get away with it. I am more focused on the financial structure of the planet. I think this quote from "Network" sums up my position beautifully.

We no longer live in a world of nations and ideologies, Mr. Beale. The world is a college of corporations, inexorably determined by the immutable bylaws of business. The world is a business, Mr. Beale. It has been since man crawled out of the slime. And our children will live, Mr. Beale, to see that... perfect world... in which there's no war or famine, oppression or brutality. One vast and ecumenical holding company, for whom all men will work to serve a common profit, in which all men will hold a share of stock.

[LordEd]

how can we go on to Youtube or Facebook and quash freeman theories if those here on Q don't really know the full answer to this question?

But we do.

I don't. I have an idea to the correct answer. However, until I read for myself and am able to explain it in simple terms to another person, with links to support my explanation, I don't consider to 'know'.

[wserra]

I am more focused on the financial structure of the planet.

Good luck. I give up.

[Hyrion]

I think this quote from "Network" sums up my position beautifully.

our children will live ... to see that... perfect world... in which there's no war or famine, oppression or brutality.

While that's a nice vision for the future - it's not reflective of reality. So long as there is a single person who believes they are "more equal than another" - there will exist a human who will take from others because they feel they are entitled to what those others have - whether or not they've actually worked to earn that something.

As a great example, take the OPCA belief that they can foist a unilateral agreement on someone all the while believing no one can foist such an agreement on them - and since (they conclude) man-made laws including criminal laws are simply agreements, they can deny those agreements with a wave of their hand.

And so long as that reality exists, someone will be needed to be a decision maker between disputes. Which means a Governing body needs to exist. As a result, the world - and reality - is more then just a financial situation.

[JamesVincent]

And don't forget some of the other powers that nations have that corporations do not. The power to sign treaties with other nations, the power to declare war, the power to build and assign embassies and ambassadors, etc. All of these, and more, can only be done by a nation-state, not just any nation either but one recognized by the world as one. So the leader of Dumfukinstan can't do any of these things. The "nations are corporations" argument is almost as bad as the "if corporations are "people" then we should be able to arrest them". I say almost as bad since part of the nation theory is correct, in some ways a nation may be a corporate entity, just not a corporation per se. Where as a corporation is not a "person", it has a legal identity and a whole laundry list of very specific and technical laws and statutes that apply to them.

Something I had said before, common sense rules out a lot of the FMOTL theology, does it make sense to make one thing equal to another when they have only one thing in common? There are tons of things a nation can do that a corporation can't do whereas there are very few things a corporation can do that a nation can't. So, they are not equal, not even close.

[JamesVincent]

We no longer live in a world of nations and ideologies, Mr. Beale. The world is a college of corporations, inexorably determined by the immutable bylaws of business. The world is a business, Mr. Beale. It has been since man crawled out of the slime. And our children will live, Mr. Beale, to see that... perfect world... in which there's no war or famine, oppression or brutality. One vast and ecumenical holding company, for whom all men will work to serve a common profit, in which all men will hold a share of stock.

A Socialistic Utopian dream. And how often has Socialism worked? (And, remember, someone has to start it and run it to get momentum so, once again, not everyone will be equal)

[Wake Up! Productions]

in some ways a nation may be a corporate entity, just not a corporation per se.

I think this statement may be the closet to the truth. A nations is without a doubt in my mind a "corporate entity". One that employs workers, takes on loans, carries debts, owns property, etc.

[wserra]

A nations is without a doubt in my mind a "corporate entity". One that employs workers, takes on loans, carries debts, owns property, etc.

I employ workers. I take on loans. I carry debts. I own property. I even etc. Guess I'm a corporation.

See what I mean about proving your propositions?

[JamesVincent]

in some ways a nation may be a corporate entity, just not a corporation per se.

I think this statement may be the closet to the truth. A nations is without a doubt in my mind a "corporate entity". One that employs workers, takes on loans, carries debts, owns property, etc.

I employ workers. I take on loans. I carry debts. I own property. I even etc. Guess I'm a corporation.

See what I mean about proving your propositions?

Which is why I specifically said, "in some ways" and then you missed the premise there. While the functions you listed are indeed some things that a corporation and a government have in common (and, as Wes pointed out, regular people have in common with both entities) they are only one very narrow area of coverage of a government's power.

edit: looked ugly, fixed it

[Hyrion]

While the functions you listed are indeed some things that a corporation and a government have in common (and, as Wes pointed out, regular people have in common with both entities) they are only one very narrow area of coverage of a government's power.

To try and help clarify further:

• The true definition to one thing compared with another lies in both their similarities and differences.

One could probably point to 100 similarities between an apple and an orange - but that doesn't make an orange an apple precisely because of their differences.

[Wake Up! Productions]

I employ workers. I take on loans. I carry debts. I own property. I even etc. Guess I'm a corporation.

No, that would make you a PERSON within the legal definition of a PERSON. A "corporate entity" is also a PERSON.

Sounds to me like someone needs to pick a law dictionary.

I will say though, you are a master at putting words in other people's mouths. In my opinion, that is the true sign of a weak opponent !!!

[arayder]

This thread is beginning to sound like a conversation shouted through a car window between a freeman and a traffic cop.

No matter how many times it is explained how large corporations like Shaw Communications and George Weston differ from the government of Canada the focus returns to how the entities are similar.

Freemen mindlessly employ a false syllogism* to complete their "governments are mere corporations" argument. Since they don't recognize their mistaken argument and probably never will, my suggestion is that those of us "get it" let these witless freemen throw themselves on the funeral pyres of their stupidity.

WUP, if you want explain to freemen where they are wrong you need to point out to them the faulty logic they are using.

-----------------------------

*"God is love. Love is blind. Stevie Wonder is blind. Stevie Wonder is God." and "Killer dogs have long teeth. You say your dog has long teeth, so it must be a killer."

[Wake Up! Productions]

This thread is beginning to sound like a conversation shouted through a car window between a freeman and a traffic cop.

No matter how many times it is explained how large corporations like Shaw Communications and George Weston differ from the government of Canada the focus returns to how the entities are similar.

Freemen mindlessly employ a false syllogism* to complete their "governments are mere corporations" argument. Since they don't recognize their mistaken argument and probably never will, my suggestion is that those of us "get it" let these witless freemen throw themselves on the funeral pyres of their stupidity.

WUP, if you want explain to freemen where they are wrong you need to point out to them the faulty logic they are using.

-----------------------------

*"God is love. Love is blind. Stevie Wonder is blind. Stevie Wonder is God." and "Killer dogs have long teeth. You say your dog has long teeth, so it must be a killer."

I almost pissed myself when I read the Stevie Wonder line. Brilliant.

My intention is not to sound like a freeman to a traffic cop. Much like Ninja, my intention is and has always been, getting to the truth of the matter. If there a members on Q that are well versed on International Law, I am more than willing to hear them out.

[arayder]

This thread is beginning to sound like a conversation shouted through a car window between a freeman and a traffic cop.

No matter how many times it is explained how large corporations like Shaw Communications and George Weston differ from the government of Canada the focus returns to how the entities are similar.

Freemen mindlessly employ a false syllogism* to complete their "governments are mere corporations" argument. Since they don't recognize their mistaken argument and probably never will, my suggestion is that those of us "get it" let these witless freemen throw themselves on the funeral pyres of their stupidity.

WUP, if you want explain to freemen where they are wrong you need to point out to them the faulty logic they are using.

-----------------------------

*"God is love. Love is blind. Stevie Wonder is blind. Stevie Wonder is God." and "Killer dogs have long teeth. You say your dog has long teeth, so it must be a killer."

I almost pissed myself when I read the Stevie Wonder line. Brilliant.

My intention is not to sound like a freeman to a traffic cop. Much like Ninja, my intention is and has always been, getting to the truth of the matter. If there a members on Q that are well versed on International Law, I am more than willing to hear them out.

I understand, WUP. It's cool and I think you are doing the right thing.

I say again that the freeman argument doesn't do a hill of beans worth of harm until it convinces duped freemen that they can ignore the law and the cops enforcing it by pretending that the law is mere "corporate policy" and the cops are just "policy enforcers".

[Wake Up! Productions]

I understand, WUP. It's cool and I think you are doing the right thing.

I say again that the freeman argument doesn't do a hill of beans worth of harm until it convinces duped freemen that they can ignore the law and the cops enforcing it by pretending that the law is mere "corporate policy" and the cops are just "policy enforcers".

And to that end, I will inject a little bit of humor at this moment ...

Jim Carrey's Message to ALL "Freeman on the Land" !!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxpuepQCzvc

[The Observer]

Call Canada a Volkswagen for all I care...

Wow! Canadians live in a Volkswagen.

[bmxninja357]

just for clarification the "countries are corporations" arguments are not only freemen arguments. they are basic opca arguments. and they stretch almost universally throught the opca universe. and for the purpose of this thread i dont think getting out of paying a loan, tax, a ticket or anything else really matters at all. people like wup and myself have many friends with this belief and many opca folks believe the corporate government thing in general. all we are asking is how we explain how federal, provincial/state governments are not corporations in a business sense of the word. through that knowledge we can then cease that proposition and stop it.

after that we can move to how town and cities are incorporated yet not corporations in the same way the local trucking company or whatever is a corporation.

this has nothing to do with not paying bills, freemen, believing laws dont apply, or thinking all court proceedings are commercial. its about governments being corporations. why when and how they are or are not; and being able to convey the reality to opca adherents in a fashion that is verifiable and easily understood.

because i said so isnt going to cut it. so if there would be some links, cases, and and source materials that help us convey this they would be most appreciated. im glad that we have a basic understanding but i do not think its enough to convince the opca crowd en masse just yet.

for example i always believed, as i said countries were incorporated just for the purpose of doing business. not to get out of tax,a loan, or a belief the law didnt apply because of it. i was still wrong and im glad i was shown the reality of it. i just dont think its in a palatable forum we can use to change the belief of folks on a large scale so we sink it in and once that domino drops many opca domino's drop with it.

and i thank all who have added to this as its an important myth to dispel. and i hope once its a clear, well linked truth we can change some thinking. and maybe one of those who makes videos could put it out on the youtubes so those attending that university can grasp the reality without having to read as they seem to hate that. lol.

peace,
ninj